WASHINGTON (CNN) - Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger used a short speech at the State Department on Wednesday to joke about the prospect of Hillary Clinton running for President in 2016.

Standing on stage with five other former or current secretaries of state, Kissinger - who served as secretary of state under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford - highlighted the work of diplomats and foreign service officers as he spoke at the groundbreaking for the United States Diplomacy Center, a museum set to honor diplomatic work.

soundoff(47 Responses)

Republicans scared?
Naw, they are just moving to China, Canada, Mexico, India, Japan, and other assorted places. Maybe you should check with your nanny. Or follow the example in Wisconsin.

September 4, 2014 12:15 pm at 12:15 pm |

Rudy NYC

Fair is Fair posted:

Uh-huh. Republicans have been doubling down on that false talking point ever since the Democrats blocked a Bush appointee to the SCOTUS when Bush tried to appoint his White House Counsel to the position.
–––
Exactly! You'd never see Obama nominate his own Solicitor General to the SCOTUS. Oh wait...
===========================================================================
Not exactly. The White House Counsel is not a position that is confirmed by Congress. The Solicitor General argues cases for the entire government, not just a political party. The Solicitor General is not a political opponent until one party sues in a court of law to have something overturned, where it becomes THE DUT of the Solicitor General to argue in support of the law.
---–
No one is arguing that. It's just an example of cronyism that you like to point out "on the other side" but turn a blind eye to when it's your guy.
==========================================================
You are making that argument. The Solicitor General is a position that must be approved by Congress. Bush tried to appoint his personal lawyer to the SCOTUS. But, let's follow your argument to its' illogical conclusion. If a POTUS appoints a person to a federal judge opening, which must be approved by Congress.

If that same POTUS later appoints that now confirmed judge to the SCOTUS, then that is cronyism according to you.

#FAIL

September 4, 2014 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm |

old age voter

@Rudy NYC
liberals like yourself have no idea what a good president is! I voted for the best president ever; John F. Kennedy. Then for Richard M. Nixon once; for James Carter once and once against him; twice for Ronald Reagan who was almost as good as JFK; once for George Bush SR; once for Bill Clinton and once against him; twice for George W. Bush and one for Barack Obama and once against him; the first vote for Obama was a big mistake.

I won’t make the mistake for voting once for Hillary!

September 4, 2014 12:33 pm at 12:33 pm |

Rudy NYC

old age voter

@Rudy NYC
liberals like yourself have no idea what a good president is! I voted for the best president ever; John F. Kennedy. Then for Richard M. Nixon once; for James Carter once and once against him; twice for Ronald Reagan who was almost as good as JFK; once for George Bush SR; once for Bill Clinton and once against him; twice for George W. Bush and one for Barack Obama and once against him; the first vote for Obama was a big mistake.

I won’t make the mistake for voting once for Hillary!
=============================================================
Voter ID laws will probably make sure you don't vote for anyone.

When it comes to fiscal responsibility, Pres. Reagan ranks as the worst in history. During his two terms he more than tripled the national debt, while the annual deficit when he left office was 10x what it was when he entered. When Pres. Obama entered office the national debt sat at about $10T, and annual deficit was about $1.5T. By Reagan's standards, the national debt would be close to $40T, and the annual deficit would be running at $15T. That's what voodoo economics does for us.

September 4, 2014 12:41 pm at 12:41 pm |

old man

Wake Up People! Many Rivers to cross.....

She's a joke alright! The mere mention of her name causes the entire Right Wing to lose what little minds they have! 😊😊

It kind of reminds me of the ACA... Even with the billions the Kochs spent trying to convince everyone how bad it was, apparently people are liking it and their liking it so much not very many GOPers are still screaming repeal.

_____________________________________________________

Good old Obama Care. Did you know that because of the Obama care law you can no longer receive treatment on the same day you see the doctor? That takes an extra day from work, and if you are not able to drive yourself an extra day from your family or friends time. For use cancer patients that makes it four days instead of three. Also the insurance companies dictate to the Doctors. My Oncologist proscribed treatment for me and the insurance company told him he could no longer do it that way. He has 30 years of experience and the insurance company tells him what to do because of Obama care.

September 4, 2014 12:46 pm at 12:46 pm |

luke, AZ

Hillary Clinton is not presidential material. She does not have the traits necessary to be our nations leader.

September 4, 2014 12:57 pm at 12:57 pm |

Rudy NYC

old man

Wake Up People! Many Rivers to cross.....

She's a joke alright! The mere mention of her name causes the entire Right Wing to lose what little minds they have! 😊😊

It kind of reminds me of the ACA... Even with the billions the Kochs spent trying to convince everyone how bad it was, apparently people are liking it and their liking it so much not very many GOPers are still screaming repeal.

_____________________________________________________

Good old Obama Care. Did you know that because of the Obama care law you can no longer receive treatment on the same day you see the doctor? That takes an extra day from work, and if you are not able to drive yourself an extra day from your family or friends time. For use cancer patients that makes it four days instead of three. Also the insurance companies dictate to the Doctors. My Oncologist proscribed treatment for me and the insurance company told him he could no longer do it that way. He has 30 years of experience and the insurance company tells him what to do because of Obama care.
=============================================================
Hmm. Sounds more like you're being taken to the cleaners by your own doctor to me, old man. Either that, or you're misunderstanding what the doctors are saying. It almost sounds like "such and such" is no longer covered in full, and that you must pay for part of the "procedure".

Health insurers have billing codes and categories for everything that they do. Some of them need to refined and probably expanded because some preventive care treatments are now being categorized as partially billable "procedures."

September 4, 2014 01:02 pm at 1:02 pm |

old man

Good old Obama Care. Did you know that because of the Obama care law you can no longer receive treatment on the same day you see the doctor? That takes an extra day from work, and if you are not able to drive yourself an extra day from your family or friends time. For use cancer patients that makes it four days instead of three. Also the insurance companies dictate to the Doctors. My Oncologist proscribed treatment for me and the insurance company told him he could no longer do it that way. He has 30 years of experience and the insurance company tells him what to do because of Obama care.
=============================================================
Hmm. Sounds more like you're being taken to the cleaners by your own doctor to me, old man. Either that, or you're misunderstanding what the doctors are saying. It almost sounds like "such and such" is no longer covered in full, and that you must pay for part of the "procedure".

Health insurers have billing codes and categories for everything that they do. Some of them need to refined and probably expanded because some preventive care treatments are now being categorized as partially billable "procedures."

-----------------
I don’t think that my doctor is taking me to the cleaners, unless there is a conspiracy of Doctors telling their patients the same thing. Maybe if the Senate read it before signing it they would have caught it. It isn’t that "such and such" is no longer covered its – Doctor prescribes 5000 MG a day for 7 days, then 7 days off then repeat. Insurance says No you must take 4000MG a day for 14 days, than 7 days off and repeat.

September 4, 2014 01:35 pm at 1:35 pm |

tom l

old man

Good old Obama Care. Did you know that because of the Obama care law you can no longer receive treatment on the same day you see the doctor? That takes an extra day from work, and if you are not able to drive yourself an extra day from your family or friends time. For use cancer patients that makes it four days instead of three. Also the insurance companies dictate to the Doctors. My Oncologist proscribed treatment for me and the insurance company told him he could no longer do it that way. He has 30 years of experience and the insurance company tells him what to do because of Obama care.
=============================================================
Hmm. Sounds more like you're being taken to the cleaners by your own doctor to me, old man. Either that, or you're misunderstanding what the doctors are saying. It almost sounds like "such and such" is no longer covered in full, and that you must pay for part of the "procedure".

Health insurers have billing codes and categories for everything that they do. Some of them need to refined and probably expanded because some preventive care treatments are now being categorized as partially billable "procedures."

-----–
I don’t think that my doctor is taking me to the cleaners, unless there is a conspiracy of Doctors telling their patients the same thing. Maybe if the Senate read it before signing it they would have caught it. It isn’t that "such and such" is no longer covered its – Doctor prescribes 5000 MG a day for 7 days, then 7 days off then repeat. Insurance says No you must take 4000MG a day for 14 days, than 7 days off and repeat.
=====

You have to understand the mindset of someone like Rudy. He trusts the government more than individuals. He thinks the government knows better than us lowly citizens. He also feels that the government owns all of the money and we are lucky to keep what we do because they could just take it all. I was told I just have to deal with that fact.

September 4, 2014 02:14 pm at 2:14 pm |

Silence DoGood

tom l
old man

Good old Obama Care. Did you know that because of the Obama care law you can no longer receive treatment on the same day you see the doctor? That takes an extra day from work, and if you are not able to drive yourself an extra day from your family or friends time. For use cancer patients that makes it four days instead of three. Also the insurance companies dictate to the Doctors. My Oncologist proscribed treatment for me and the insurance company told him he could no longer do it that way. He has 30 years of experience and the insurance company tells him what to do because of Obama care.
=============================================================
Hmm. Sounds more like you're being taken to the cleaners by your own doctor to me, old man. Either that, or you're misunderstanding what the doctors are saying. It almost sounds like "such and such" is no longer covered in full, and that you must pay for part of the "procedure".

Health insurers have billing codes and categories for everything that they do. Some of them need to refined and probably expanded because some preventive care treatments are now being categorized as partially billable "procedures."

-––
I don’t think that my doctor is taking me to the cleaners, unless there is a conspiracy of Doctors telling their patients the same thing. Maybe if the Senate read it before signing it they would have caught it. It isn’t that "such and such" is no longer covered its – Doctor prescribes 5000 MG a day for 7 days, then 7 days off then repeat. Insurance says No you must take 4000MG a day for 14 days, than 7 days off and repeat.
=====

You have to understand the mindset of someone like Rudy. He trusts the government more than individuals. He thinks the government knows better than us lowly citizens. He also feels that the government owns all of the money and we are lucky to keep what we do because they could just take it all. I was told I just have to deal with that fact.
----------
Replace "government" with "corporations" in the above paragraph and you have the Conservative mindset.
Walmart slave labor and Big Insurance denying health coverage is all you need to know to debunk that.

September 4, 2014 02:30 pm at 2:30 pm |

tom l

Replace "government" with "corporations" in the above paragraph and you have the Conservative mindset.
Walmart slave labor and Big Insurance denying health coverage is all you need to know to debunk that.
=====

I know you were just dying to get your talking point in there but it really doesn't make sense. Govt is elected by the population and therefore work for us. Corporations do not and you have the choice whether to work for them or not. And using the term "slave labor" should be about as offensive a term as there is. You seem to be minimizing what being a slave really was as compared to someone working for an hourly wage that you don't find to be acceptable and, all the while, ignoring all of the good things that come from Walmart like inexpensive goods for people that don't have a of money. And I'm very impressed that you feel that a corporation (Big insurance) should enter into a contract where they will be losing money. Yeah, that makes sense.

You see, this is where the government could have actually done some good but they decided to overtake everything. They could have taken those with pre-existing conditions and put them into a large pool and had that subsidized affecting and helping those in that situation. Instead, they decided to do something that affects everyone. And despite what you try to say, it affected everyone.

September 4, 2014 02:46 pm at 2:46 pm |

Rudy NYC

"You have to understand the mindset of someone like Rudy. He trusts the government more than individuals. He thinks the government knows better than us lowly citizens. He also feels that the government owns all of the money and we are lucky to keep what we do because they could just take it all. I was told I just have to deal with that fact."
------------------------------------–
You have to understand tom's mindset, wonderworld. He trusts that people will always do the right thing, despite the fact that he admits that scenario is just not how reality works. But, one has to respect the fact that he pushes for an idyllic world, filled with ideal people.

Trusting government is the lesser of the two evils, tom. Given free reign, "people" will always act selfishly and will only do what serves their own best interests. Greed will almost always prevail over benevolence.

September 4, 2014 02:51 pm at 2:51 pm |

Rudy NYC

tom l

Replace "government" with "corporations" in the above paragraph and you have the Conservative mindset.
Walmart slave labor and Big Insurance denying health coverage is all you need to know to debunk that.
=====

I know you were just dying to get your talking point in there but it really doesn't make sense. Govt is elected by the population and therefore work for us. Corporations do not and you have the choice whether to work for them or not. And using the term "slave labor" should be about as offensive a term as there is. You seem to be minimizing what being a slave really was as compared to someone working for an hourly wage that you don't find to be acceptable and, all the while, ignoring all of the good things that come from Walmart like inexpensive goods for people that don't have a of money. And I'm very impressed that you feel that a corporation (Big insurance) should enter into a contract where they will be losing money. Yeah, that makes sense.
-----------------------
You're the one not making sense, tom. No one is forcing a corporation to enter into a contract where they will be losing money, especially seeing how the corporation sets the premium on a non-negotiable contract. Besides, if the corporation loses money and goes out of business, then that's just market forces at work. Right?

September 4, 2014 02:55 pm at 2:55 pm |

Rudy NYC

tom l wrote:

You see, this is where the government could have actually done some good but they decided to overtake everything. They could have taken those with pre-existing conditions and put them into a large pool and had that subsidized affecting and helping those in that situation. Instead, they decided to do something that affects everyone. And despite what you try to say, it affected everyone.
-----------------------–
Uh, do you mean subsidized programs like Medicare and Medicaid? We already have that, tom. Taa-Daa.

September 4, 2014 02:57 pm at 2:57 pm |

old age voter

@Rudy NYC "When it comes to fiscal responsibility, Pres. Reagan ranks as the worst in history"
fact are facts;
In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.

September 5, 2014 11:48 am at 11:48 am |

Rudy NYC

old age voter

@Rudy NYC "When it comes to fiscal responsibility, Pres. Reagan ranks as the worst in history"
fact are facts;
In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.
----------------------------–
Why did you pick "19" months? Why not 18 or 24? If you want to argue absolutes, go right ahead. Everyone knows your argument is meaningless. Nothing changes the facts. Reagan more than tripled the national debt, and ballooned the annual deficit by a factor of ten. If he were to do that today, the national debt would $40 trillion.

The country was in still in the midst of the Great Recession for the first 6 months of the Obama administration. We were also spending under a Continuing Resolution that had been set by the Bush administration because TARP had blown the lid off of the FY2008-2009 budget. As I recall, TARP could have passed in late September 2008, but Republicans didn't vote for it until after the new fiscal year had begun. TARP was passed on October 2, 2008, put it into the FY2008-2009 budget.

Nothing changes the fact that since 2011, the Tea Party controlled House has ran up more debt than that.

September 5, 2014 12:37 pm at 12:37 pm |

Fair is Fair

Rudy NYC

Nothing changes the fact that since 2011, the Tea Party controlled House has ran up more debt than that.
--------–
If you're going to play that game, then ask yourself how much debt was run up by the 2007 – 2010 Nancy Pelosi house.

You see, this is where the government could have actually done some good but they decided to overtake everything. They could have taken those with pre-existing conditions and put them into a large pool and had that subsidized affecting and helping those in that situation. Instead, they decided to do something that affects everyone. And despite what you try to say, it affected everyone.
———————————————————————–
Uh, do you mean subsidized programs like Medicare and Medicaid? We already have that, tom. Taa-Daa.
---

Wow! I had no idea that Medicare and Medicaid covered people anyone that has pre existing conditions. What's so funny about you Rudy is that I threw out a perfectly reasonable solution and compromise to people with pre existing conditions and you have no desire to have an actual conversation. You'd rather do your Rudy thing.

#NOBODY'SFOLLOWING#NOBODYSFOOLED

September 5, 2014 01:21 pm at 1:21 pm |

Rudy NYC

Fair is Fair

Rudy NYC

Nothing changes the fact that since 2011, the Tea Party controlled House has ran up more debt than that.
--––
If you're going to play that game, then ask yourself how much debt was run up by the 2007 – 2010 Nancy Pelosi house.
=======================================================================
I didn't start the game. I simply finish them. Ask yourself how much debt Republicans rang up between 2001 and 2007. If you set aside TARP, Bush's two wars, and the Stimulus, which stopped economic collapse, the Democrats really didn't spend much. Republicans, on the other hand, ran up quite the bill.

September 5, 2014 01:32 pm at 1:32 pm |

Anonymous

old age voter

fact are facts;
In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The first 9 months of the Obama administration were the bush admin budget as the federal budget year begins on October 1 and ends on September 30. How much of that increase in spending took place during that time-frame?

September 5, 2014 01:33 pm at 1:33 pm |

Rudy NYC

Uh, do you mean subsidized programs like Medicare and Medicaid? We already have that, tom. Taa-Daa.
-

Wow! I had no idea that Medicare and Medicaid covered people anyone that has pre existing conditions. What's so funny about you Rudy is that I threw out a perfectly reasonable solution and compromise to people with pre existing conditions and you have no desire to have an actual conversation. You'd rather do your Rudy thing.
============================================================================
I am not surprised that you find overwhelming disbelief went confronted with reality. Where do you think those uninsured people went before the Affordable Care Act, tom? After people bankrupted themselves, they turned to Medicare/Medicaid because private insurers weren't picking them up. You talk utter nonsense.

BTW, how did you plan to pay for your subsidies, tom? You've already made it clear that you don't want your tax dollars going towards something like Medicare or Medicaid.

September 5, 2014 01:39 pm at 1:39 pm |

Anonymous

Yet another message thread reopened on another two-day old story still at the top on the ticker while the "liberal" media continues its news blackout concerning the recently-convicted felon ex-VA governor and his recently convicted felon wife. Does anyone else sense a bit of bias with today's "liberal" media?